Jaime De La Cruz’s comeback victory was powered by a campaign
strategy to encourage absentee voting
– a practice that is legal.
Jaime De La Cruz’s comeback victory was powered by a campaign strategy to encourage absentee voting – a practice that is legal.
With a 10-vote triumph and incumbent Bob Cruz’s admission Thursday he didn’t follow the same approach, it is likely the reason De La Cruz – if he lasts a legal challenge – will be the new supervisor in District 5.
Still, Elections Office documents show only a slightly higher boost of absentee voting in District 5 than other districts involving supervisor races in the March election.
In the District 5 race that is now under investigation, 40 percent of the ballots cast were absentee.
De La Cruz’s margin of victory on absentee ballots was 383–311.
That means out of the 730 absentee ballots cast in the district race, De La Cruz obtained 52 percent of the votes – and Cruz 43 percent.
“Absolutely,” De La Cruz said, he advocated absent voting during his campaign.
“I did it because there’s a tendency for people being so busy on election day,” he said. “If you vote by mail, you have 15 or 20 days to decide who you’re going to vote for.”
In the District 1 race won by Don Marcus during the March primary, 39 percent of votes were absentee. And in District 2, in which a run-off will take place in November, 29 percent were absentee.
In the other two districts, supervisors Pat Loe and Reb Monaco will be up for re-election in two years. In those two districts, 37 percent and 30 percent, respectively, voted absentee.
The practice of candidates encouraging residents to vote absentee, head elections official John Hodges emphasized, is legal and often used in local political races.
The Elections Office’s counting of improperly returned ballots – along with other allegations of improper voting – has been the focus of investigations by a county-hired inspector and the Secretary of State’s Office. A lawsuit filed by Cruz’s wife, Marian, challenges the district’s result and requests a new race on the November ballot.
A spokesman with the state office Thursday said they consider a candidate’s promotion of absentee voting “the same as encouraging to vote in general.”
“There’s no real concern on our part,” he said. “There’s no legality questions.”
According to Hodges, the increased use of voting through the absentee process is a continuing trend in San Benito County.
“More and more people,” he said, “are going to the requesting of absentee ballots.”
The total number of absentee ballots cast in the county has increased since 2000, according to documents.
Even between the 2002 and 2004 elections, it relatively soared.
Two years ago, 24 percent of the total turnout – that includes all five districts – voted on absentee ballots. In March, 34 percent did so, according to documents.
Plus, in District 5 specifically, it is difficult to compare voting statistics from 2004 to either 2002 or 2000.
During the last presidential primary in 2000, Cruz ran for re-election. But he was unopposed.
That year, 431 absentee ballots were cast in District 5, or 24 percent of the total ballots cast. Moreover, after that year’s census, district boundaries and populations changed.
Two years later, Cruz’s seat was not up for re-election. That year, 352 absent ballots were cast, or 26 percent of the total in the district.
When asked Thursday whether he has encouraged residents to vote using absentee ballots, Cruz said no. Beyond that, he declined comment.
